Water Issues in Georgia:

Transcription

1 Water Issues in Georgia: A Survey of Public Perceptions and Attitudes about Water Prepared by Jason Evans, Carl Vinson Institute of Government, University of Georgia Jon Calabria, College of Environment and Design, University of Georgia Warren Brown, Carl Vinson Institute of Government, University of Georgia Alice Miller Keyes, Georgia Environmental Protection Division Mark Risse, Department of Biological and Agricultural Engineering, College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, University of Georgia Originally published by the Carl Vinson Institute of Government, The University of Georgia, Athens, April 2011

2 Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...1 INTRODUCTION...2 STATE WATER RESOURCES OVERVIEW...2 STATE DEMOGRAPHICS AND RESPONDENT CHARACTERISTICS...4 FINDINGS...7 CONCLUSION APPENDIX A: Letter of Invitation APPENDIX B: Survey Questionnaire This project was funded by the U.S. Department of Agriculture National Institute of Food and Agriculture under agreement , also known as the Southern Region Water Resource Project. The Southern Region Water Resource Project is a partnership of the University of Georgia Cooperative Extension, 21 collaborating land grant universities in the southern United States, and the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture. This survey is part of a national project conducted by Robert Mahler, Professor of Soil and Environmental Sciences at the University of Idaho, under USDA project

3 Water Issues in Georgia: A Survey of Public Perceptions and Attitudes about Water EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report summarizes the Georgia results of a survey project to gauge water resource awareness, attitudes, and behaviors among citizens across the country. These results reflect the opinions and perceptions of the survey respondents but should not necessarily be viewed as representative of the entire state s population. The results provide useful information for water resource extension professionals and others to consider in developing content and strategies for public education and outreach. Beliefs about Water Quality A large majority of survey respondents consider clean drinking water (94%), clean rivers and lakes (76%), and clean groundwater (75%) as very important. Respondents have greater confidence in the quality of groundwater (24% believe it is good or excellent; 10% believe it is good and improving) than they do in the quality of surface waters (10% as good or excellent; 17% good and improving) and ocean waters (8% as good or excellent; 10% good and improving). Conditions Perceived to Affect Local Water Quality The sources respondents cited as most responsible for water pollution problems are industry (45%), erosion from roads and/or construction (39%), new suburban development (34%), and stormwater (29%). Fewer than 20% of respondents cited agriculture (whether crop-based or animal-based) as being most responsible for local water pollution. However, more than 35% of respondents either suspect or firmly believe that agricultural sources such as fertilizers and pesticides are having some impact on water resources in their local area. Protecting Local Waters With regard to the protection of local waters, respondents expressed the highest level of confidence in local government officials, with 11% indicating that local government is performing this task very well and 43% reporting moderately well. State government performance received the next highest response ratings (6% very well; 38% moderately well). Somewhat less confidence was expressed in how the federal government (4% very well; 27% moderately well) and individual citizens (4% very well; 38% moderately well) are performing. Water Quantity Many respondents believe that adequate water quantity is either definitely (22%) or probably (22%) a problem for their communities currently. Approximately 40% of respondents believe that there is a low likelihood of their community meeting all resource needs in 10 years. Only 16% believe that there is a high likelihood of these future needs being met. Learning about Water Issues The most common source that respondents have relied upon to receive water resource information is local newspapers (65%). However, respondents indicated that they are more likely to use sources such as Web sites (46%); fact sheets, bulletins, or brochures (45%); or television (42%) than newspapers (38%) for learning about water resource issues in the future. Specific topics that relatively large numbers of respondents indicated an interest in learning more about included protecting public drinking water supplies (40%), water management in home and garden landscapes (28%), septic maintenance (26%), fish and wildlife water needs (26%), watershed management (25%), and well protection (21%).

4 Water Issues in Georgia: A Survey of Public Perceptions and Attitudes about Water INTRODUCTION The critical need for better water stewardship in Georgia has been underscored in recent years by a succession of severe droughts and floods as well as ongoing legal disputes with adjacent states and federal agencies about the allocation of available water within shared watersheds. Recognizing this need, the Georgia State Assembly in 2008 established a regional framework for water resource planning through the enactment of the Georgia Comprehensive Statewide Water Management Plan. A series of additional statewide water conservation measures were then put into effect with passage of the Georgia Water Stewardship Act of The Water Plan and the Stewardship Act both notably call for significant outreach and extension to encourage the voluntary adoption of water conservation practices among water utilities, industry, farmers, and the general public to reduce water demand. To be effective in this role, outreach and extension professionals clearly can benefit from having a deep understanding of the existing attitudes about water issues among target stakeholder groups. In 2009, a survey project to gauge general perceptions and attitudes about water resource issues was conducted in Georgia as part of a national water quality survey effort. The survey instrument contained 59 questions developed by state water quality coordinators under the leadership of Robert Mahler, Professor of Soil and Environmental Sciences at the University of Idaho. The survey in Georgia was mailed to 1,998 randomly selected Georgia citizens using a Dillman four-stage mail survey methodology. A first mailing included a cover letter (Appendix A), the survey (Appendix B), and a postage-paid return envelope. A reminder card was then sent as the second mailing. After 20 days, a second survey with cover letter and a postage-paid return envelope were sent to those who had not yet responded. A final reminder card was then sent after 20 days to those who had still not responded. A total of 519 surveys were returned (a response rate of 26%) using this method. The survey distribution and response tabulation were also led by Professor Mahler. This report summarizes key results from the survey for the purpose of assisting outreach professionals with their efforts to engage the public about critical water resource issues that face the state. The findings are reported as percentages of valid responses to each of the questions that are discussed (i.e., blank responses were not counted toward the total percentage for questions that required a response). Detailed analysis and interpretation of the Georgia responses were conducted collaboratively by faculty at the University of Georgia s Carl Vinson Institute of Government, College of Environment and Design, and College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences as well as staff from the Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Environmental Protection Division. This survey project was conducted through the Southern Region Water Resources Project with funds provided by grant # of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) 406 Water Quality Program. The project is a regional collaboration funded by the USDA National Institute for Food and Agriculture (NIFA) for the purpose of building partnerships to address water resource concerns among government agencies, business leaders, and other citizen stakeholders. STATE WATER RESOURCES OVERVIEW Georgia is drained by 14 major river basins (Map 1). The headwaters of all but 4 of these basins (Ochlockonee, Satilla, Suwannee, and St. Marys) are located in the Mountain, Valley and Ridge, and/ 2 Water Issues in Georgia UGA Cooperative Extension Bulletin 1385

5 Map 1: River Basins of Georgia UGA Cooperative Extension Bulletin 1385 Water Issues in Georgia 3

6 or Piedmont physiographic provinces, flowing over into the Coastal Plain at the Fall Line (see Map 2). Importantly, many of Georgia s river basins are shared with neighboring states, including large river basins such as the Chattahoochee, Savannah, and Tennessee. Average annual rainfall for the entire state is approximately 51 inches. However, annual averages vary throughout the state, with some areas of the northern mountains receiving in excess of 60 inches, while Macon and Augusta receive only about 45 inches (Map 3). Water supply sources in Georgia also vary by region but are much more a function of differences in the underlying hydrogeology than in regional climate. The southern regions of the state located below the Fall Line obtain most of their supply from productive carbonate aquifers that contain high-quality groundwater. By contrast, the northern Piedmont and Mountain regions generally lack productive aquifers and therefore utilize surface waters such as rivers and man-made reservoirs as primary water supply sources. STATE DEMOGRAPHICS AND RESPONDENT CHARACTERISTICS Georgia s resident population was 9.7 million as reported in the 2010 U.S. Census. The state s population increased by 1.5 million in the decade since The largest metropolitan area is Atlanta Sandy Springs Marietta, with an estimated population of 5.5 million in 2009 more than 10 times the size of the next largest metropolitan area. The other metro areas wholly or partially in Georgia, by 2009 population, are Augusta Richmond County, GA SC (539,154); Chattanooga, TN GA (524,303); Savannah, GA (343,092); Columbus, GA AL (292,795); Macon, GA (231,576); Athens Clarke County, GA (192,222); and Albany, GA (165,440). The per capita income of Georgia residents in 2008 was $34,849, substantially below the U.S. per capita income of $40,166. In 2008, there were 5.6 million jobs in the state, and the leading sectors of employment were state and local government (10.9%), retail trade (10.2%), health care and social assistance (8.3%), and manufacturing (7.7%). Figures 1 and 2 show the survey demographics. 30% Figure 1: Age Distribution of Survey Respondents and Adult Georgia Residents (Age 25 and Older) 20% Survey State 10% 0% >85 Age range 4 Water Issues in Georgia UGA Cooperative Extension Bulletin 1385

7 Map 2: Physiographic Provinces of Georgia UGA Cooperative Extension Bulletin 1385 Water Issues in Georgia 5

8 Map 3: Precipitation in Georgia 6 Water Issues in Georgia UGA Cooperative Extension Bulletin 1385

9 Figure 2: Educational Attainment of Survey Respondents and Adult Georgia Residents (Age 25 and Older) 30% 20% Survey State 10% 0% < High school High school graduate Some college College degree Advanced college degree Survey respondents were somewhat older (Figure 1), much more likely to be male (64% male, 36% female versus state average of 48% male, 52% female), and more highly educated than the average adult population of Georgia (Figure 2). These significant differences indicate that the results from the survey should not be inferred to represent the opinions of the general population as a whole. About 41% of respondents live inside a town or city limits, with the remaining 59% living in unincorporated areas. Approximately 4% of respondents reported that they are actively engaged in farming. Relatively similar numbers of respondents reported living in cities with populations greater than 100,000 (32%), intermediatesized communities of 25,000 to 100,000 (36%), and communities of fewer than 25,000 (32%). Most respondents can be categorized as long-term residents, having either lived in Georgia for their entire lives (39%) or resided in the state for more than 10 years (48%). Only 5% report having moved to the state in the past 5 years, with another 8% indicating that they have lived in the state for 5 to 9 years. FINDINGS Water Quality Importance of Water Issues Respondents were given a list of water issues and asked to rate each according to its importance (Figure 3). All respondents reported that clean drinking water is either very important (94%) or important (6%). Similarly, there is a high level of concern for freshwater systems as indicated by attitudes toward clean rivers and lakes (76% very important; 23% important) and clean groundwater (75% very important; 23% important). Slightly lower, but still quite high, levels of concern were expressed for coastal issues such as clean marine water (67% very important; 31% important), clean bays and estuaries (66% very important; 30% important), and clean water UGA Cooperative Extension Bulletin 1385 Water Issues in Georgia 7

10 for shellfishing (61% very important; 32% important). A majority of respondents gave a ranking of very important to water for agriculture (58%) and water for aquatic habitat (54%), with most other respondents ranking these issues as important (36% and 35%, respectively). A substantial majority of respondents ranked several other human uses as either very important or important, including municipal use (46% very important; 41% important), power generation and other industrial uses (41% very important; 47% important), water for recreation (38% very important; 40% important), and water for household landscapes (26% very important; 41% important). Significant levels of concern were also expressed for interstate transfer or sale of water (25% very important; 30% important), within-state transfer or sale of water (25% very important; 32% important), and coastal hypoxia (28% very important; 24% important). However, knowledge or concern about this last set of issues appeared to be relatively low among respondents, as indicated by the comparatively high rate of no opinion responses (30%, 32%, and 41%, respectively). Drinking Water As shown in Figure 4, a majority of total respondents receive their water from a public supply source, including 57% from a municipal public source and 11% from a rural water district. Approximately 17% depend on private water systems (private wells, river, pond, or lake), and 13% use bottled water as their primary drinking water source. Not surprisingly, a significant percentage of respondents living outside city limits reported using wells and other private sources as their drinking water source (28%), while use of private water sources was quite rare among those living in cities (<1%). However, most respondents living outside cities rely upon a public Figure 3: Importance of Water Issues Interstate transfer/sale of water rights Within- state transfer/sale of water rights Water for household landscapes Hypoxia (Gulf dead zone) Water for recreabon Water for commerce/industry/power generabon Water for municipal use Water for aquabc habitat Water for agriculture Clean water for shellfishing Clean bays and estuaries Clean marine water Clean beaches Clean groundwater Clean rivers and lakes Clean drinking water 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Very Important Important No Opinion Somewhat Important Not Important 8 Water Issues in Georgia UGA Cooperative Extension Bulletin 1385

11 supply source, whether municipal (44%) or from a rural water district (15%). A slightly higher percentage of respondents living in cities (15%) use bottled water compared with those living in unincorporated areas (12%). Approximately 88% of respondents believe that their home drinking water is safe to drink, and most (68%) report that they are satisfied with their drinking water (Figure 5). However, 16% report that they are not satisfied with their home drinking water. About 38% of respondents reported having a home water filter, and 5% have home water treatment systems. A little over half (51%) of respondents indicated that they often use bottled water for drinking purposes. Respondents served by private water supply sources gave their water somewhat higher ratings for safety (95%) and satisfaction (88%) than those who use public water supplies (92% safety; 77% satisfaction). Those respondents who use bottled water reported the lowest ratings for their home tap water (63% safety; 24% satisfaction). While only 12% of total respondents reported having their home drinking water tested, a relatively large percentage (40%) of those with private water supplies conduct tests. By way of comparison, only 5% of those living in cities and served by a public water supply source reported testing their water. 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% Private supply Figure 4: Drinking Water Sources Public supply Public supply rural Purchase bo:led I don't know Overall City limits Outside city Figure 5: Drinking Water Attitudes and Behaviors I feel that my drinking water is safe to drink I am sadsfied with my drinking water I ofen use bocled water for drinking purposes I have a water filter I am not sadsfied with my current drinking water I never buy bocled water I purchase 5- gallon containers of drinking water I have a water treatment system My drinking water is separate from my water supply system 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% UGA Cooperative Extension Bulletin 1385 Water Issues in Georgia 9

12 Beliefs about Water Quality Respondent attitudes about water quality were generally more positive for groundwater than for surface water and ocean water (Figure 6). However, responses for both groundwater and surface water varied considerably according to where respondents live (Figures 7 and 8). Most significantly, only 13% of respondents living inside city limits believe the quality of groundwater in their area to be good or excellent, while approximately 32% percent of those who live outside cities believe that the quality of groundwater in their area is good or excellent. Conversely, 28% of respondents in cities report good but deteriorating (10%), fair (15%), or poor (3%) groundwater quality compared with 20% living outside cities (good but deteriorating 12%, fair 6%, and poor 2%). However, a high proportion of respondents living both inside cities (48%) and outside city limits (38%) indicated that they do not know or have no opinion about groundwater quality in their area. Relatively few respondents (19%) reported do not know or no opinion about surface water. Notably, only 10% of total respondents indicated that surface waters in their area were of good or excellent quality, including only 6% in city limits and 13% outside city limits. A little more than half of total respondents (54%) indicated a belief that quality of surface waters in their area was deteriorating, fair, or poor. This percentage included 59% of those living in cities and 51% outside cities. Respondent attitudes toward the state of the ocean were even less positive, with only 8% reporting ocean water quality in the southern states as good or excellent. The largest percentage of respondents indicated their belief that ocean water quality is good but deteriorating (31%), with large percentages reporting either fair (15%) or poor (13%). There was very little difference in attitudes about ocean water quality between city respondents and those living in unincorporated areas (not graphed). Figure 6: Overall Beliefs about Water Quality 50% 40% 30% 20% Groundwater Surface water Ocean water 10% 0% Good or excellent Good and improving Good but deteriora;ng Fair Poor but improving Poor No opinion/don't know 10 Water Issues in Georgia UGA Cooperative Extension Bulletin 1385

13 Figure 7: Groundwater Quality Beliefs, by Residence 60% 40% 20% City 0% Good or excellent Good and improving Good but deteriora9ng Fair Poor but improving Poor No opinion/don't know Outside city Figure 8: Surface Water Quality Beliefs, by Residence 30% 20% 10% 0% Good or excellent Good and Good but Fair Poor but Poor No opinion/don't City Outside city Conditions Perceived to Affect Local Water Quality When asked about their knowledge or suspicions about how specific pollutant sources may be affecting local water quality, the largest percentage of respondents reported do not know for all categories (Figure 9). However, some general trends about the types of pollutant sources that respondents are concerned about can be discerned. For example, a comparatively large percentage of respondents reported having concerns Respondents were also asked to indicate the top three sources of existing pollution problems for rivers and lakes in Georgia from a list of possible sources (Figure 10). The highest percentage (44%) cited industry, with erosion from roads and/or construction (39%), new suburban development (34%), and stormwater runoff (29%) also viewed as major problems. A somewhat greater percentage of those living in cities cited industry (47%) and new suburban development (37%) than did those living in unincorporated areas UGA Cooperative Extension Bulletin 1385 Water Issues in Georgia 11

14 about pollutants typically associated with agricultural operations, with nitrate fertilizers most commonly cited as a source of both suspected (31%) and known (6%) water contamination, followed closely by pesticides (31% suspected; 5% known) and phosphate fertilizers (30% suspected; 5% known). Respondents showed a broad level of concern about a wide variety of other contaminants, including algae (21% suspected; 4% known), pathogens (20% suspected; 4% known), heavy metals (18% suspected; 4% known), pharmaceuticals (18% suspected; 4% known), septic systems (18% suspected; 4% known), minerals (18% suspected; 3% known), and petroleum products (16% suspected; 3% known). Of least concern was contamination from mining operations (5% suspected; 2% known) and salinity (5% suspected; 2% known). (43% for industry; 34% new suburban development). Similar percentages of total respondents cited cropbased agriculture (18%), wastewater treatment plants (18%), runoff from home landscapes (18%), landfills (17%), and septic tanks (17%). Sources viewed as somewhat less problematic include animal agriculture (14%), forestry (8%), and oil wells/mining (8%). By far the least cited source was military bases (2%). Although opinions about pollution sources among city residents and those living in unincorporated areas were generally similar for each category, somewhat different response rates were found for septic tanks (11% in cities; 21% in unincorporated areas) and runoff from home landscapes (21% in cities; 15% in unincorporated areas). Figure 9: Specific Local Water Quality Problems Cited Fer>lizer/nitrates Pes>cides Fer>lizer/phosphates Sep>c systems Salinity Product and wastewater from Algae Pharmaceu>cals Petroleum products Know it is a problem Suspect it is a problem Don't know Suspect it is not a problem Know it is not a problem Heavy metals Minerals Pathogens 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 12 Water Issues in Georgia UGA Cooperative Extension Bulletin 1385

15 Figure 10: Sources Cited as Most Responsible for Surface Water Pollution Industry Erosion from roads and/ or construccon, repair New suburban development Stormwater runoff Agriculture - crops Wastewater treatment plants Runoff from home landscapes SepCc tanks Landfills Agriculture - animals Forestry Oil wells and mining Military bases 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Water Quantity The severe drought of brought renewed attention to the fragility of Georgia s freshwater supply sources, particularly within the Piedmont and Mountain watersheds that serve the heavily populated and fast-growing metropolitan Atlanta region. Given this context, it is perhaps unsurprising that almost half of respondents (48%) reported that they view the likelihood of prolonged drought as increasing, while only 7% reported that prolonged drought is becoming less likely (Figure 11). When specifically asked if global warming will affect rainfall amounts in their local area, a little over a quarter of respondents expected either a slight (15%) or significant decrease (12%) in rainfall, with another quarter (26%) expecting no change at all and the largest percentage (37%) indicating that they do not know (Figure 12). Figure 11: Attitudes toward Likelihood of Prolonged Drought Likelihood will increase Likelihood will decrease Likelihood will stay the same No opinion UGA Cooperative Extension Bulletin 1385 Water Issues in Georgia 13

16 Figure 12: Attitudes toward Effect of Global Warming on Rainfall 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Significant increase Slight increase No change Slight decrease Significant decrease Don't know Respondents were asked to rate the extent of water quantity concerns in their local area (Figure 13). Almost identical percentages of respondents believe water quantity is a problem (44% definitely or probably a problem) as do not believe it is a problem (44% definitely or probably not a problem). Confidence was, however, significantly stronger among respondents who believe water quantity is a problem, with 22% reporting definitely. By contrast, only 11% of those who do not believe water quantity is a problem reported definitely. Respondents living in cities showed significantly higher levels of concern about water quantity (26% probably; 25% definitely a problem) versus respondents living in unincorporated areas (20% probably; 20% definitely a problem). Future outlook regarding water resources was fairly pessimistic. The highest number (40%) of respondents reported that there was a low likelihood of their local area being able to meet all water resource needs in 10 years, while only 16% believe that there is a high likelihood of future water needs being met (Figure 14). Attitudes among respondents living in cities (13% high likelihood; 37% medium likelihood; 43% low likelihood) were somewhat more pessimistic than those of respondents living outside city limits (19% high likelihood; 36% medium likelihood; 38% low likelihood). Figure 13: Extent of Water Quantity Concerns Definitely not a problem Probably not a problem Don't know Probably a problem Definitely a problem 14 Water Issues in Georgia UGA Cooperative Extension Bulletin 1385

17 Figure 14: Likelihood of Local Area Meeting Water Resource Needs in 10 Years Low likelihood Medium likelihood High likelihood No opinion Protecting Local Waters Participants were asked to rate the performance of the federal government, state government, local governments, and individual citizens in protecting the water resources of their communities (Figure 15). The most favorable responses were given for local governments (county, city, or town), with more than half of respondents reporting that local governments are either fulfilling their water protection responsibilities very well (11%) or moderately well (43%) and relatively few expressing negative views (17% somewhat poorly; 7% very poorly). The next highest ratings (6% very well; 38% moderately well) were for state government. The federal government (4% very well; 27% moderately well) and individual citizens (4% very well; 27% moderately well) received the lowest ratings for their ability to protect water resources. Similar percentages of respondents had negative views about how well the federal government (24% somewhat poorly; 12% very poorly), state government (25% somewhat poorly; 10% very poorly), and individual citizens (26% somewhat poorly; 8% very poorly) are fulfilling their water resource protection responsibilities. In a series of questions in which respondents were prompted to rank the importance of specific water resource protection actions, all of the specific actions received a ranking of important or very important by at least 75% of respondents (Figure 16). The action that received the highest ranking was water quality monitoring to detect pollution (56% very important; 35% important), followed very closely by Figure 15: Group Performance in Protecting Local Water Resources Individual cibzens Federal government State government County, city, or town Very well Moderately well Don't know Somewhat poorly Very poorly 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% UGA Cooperative Extension Bulletin 1385 Water Issues in Georgia 15

18 Figure 16: Importance of Water Resource Protection Actions stormwater runoff BeOer management of fishing, ATVs) Improving home and garden BeOer management of shoreline access to prevent erosion Preserving agricultural land and open space Improving agricultural Preserving and restoring buffer zones and wetlands Making water quality and data available to public Building new water storage structures (dams, reservoirs) water municipal officials Improving wastewater treatment Improving water quality monitoring to detect 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Very important Important No opinion Somewhat Important Not important No opinion Somewhat Im Not important improved wastewater treatment (55% very important; 36% important). Other actions that respondents regarded as especially important included educating municipal officials (50% very important; 39% important), residential water conservation (48% very important; 40% important), and building new water storage structures (45% very important; 40% important). While still generally supportive of the actions, respondents were least concerned about the importance of improving home and garden practices (33% very important; 45% important), better management of recreation activities (33% very important; 43% important), and treatment of stormwater runoff (31% very important; 44% important). Personal Natural Resource Ethics and Actions Survey participants were asked to chart their overall opinion about environmental issues on a scale ranging from total natural resource use to total environmental protection, with the middle point indicating an equal balance between use and protection (see Question 46, Appendix B). While most respondents placed themselves in the equal balance category (57%), significantly more favored total environmental protection (27%) than supported total resource use (16%). Interestingly, slightly higher percentages of respondents living in cities identified themselves on the far ends of the spectrum (17% total use; 30% total environmental protection) compared with residents living in unincorporated areas (14% total use; 25% total environmental protection). However, the equal balance category still characterized the majority of respondents in both cities (53%) and outside cities (61%). The survey contained a series of questions that explored the various sources of information that respondents use to form their beliefs about environmental issues (Figure 17). By far the most influential source in terms of changing respondent minds about the environment was news coverage (cited by 52%). Conversations with other people (32%), firsthand observations (28%), and financial 16 Water Issues in Georgia UGA Cooperative Extension Bulletin 1385

19 considerations (18%) were the next most influential. Relatively few changed their minds because of classes or presentations (10%), attending public meetings or volunteer activities (8%), or hearing a speech by a public official (4%). Participants were also asked about ways they may have adjusted their own behavior to conserve water or preserve water quality (Figure 18). The most cited action in the responses was changes in the frequency of watering yards (67%). Surprisingly little difference was found between the percentage of respondents living in a city (66%) and those living in unincorporated areas (68%) who reported changing their yard-watering frequency. Adoption of new technologies such as low-flow toilets was cited by a relatively large number of respondents (40%), while somewhat lower percentages reported changing the use of pesticides, fertilizers, or other chemicals (28%) or changing the way their yard is landscaped (24%). The fewest reported having their septic tanks pumped (16%), although, as would be expected, response rates regarding septic tanks varied significantly between those who live in cities (8%) and those in unincorporated areas (21%). Figure 17: Influence of Information Sources on Views toward Environmental Issues Speech by elected official A@ending public mee6ngs or volunteer ac6vi6es Classes or presenta6ons Financial considera6ons Firsthand observa6on Conversa6ons with other people News coverage 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% Figure 18: Actions Taken to Conserve Water or Preserve Water Quality Preserve Water Quality Pumped sepgc system (if any) Changed the way yard is landscaped Changed use of pesgcides, ferglizers, or other chemicals Adopted new technologies (low- flow faucets, etc.) Changed how o5en yard is watered 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% UGA Cooperative Extension Bulletin 1385 Water Issues in Georgia 17

20 Few respondents reported participation in various civic activities (not graphed). The highest number (9%) participated in county, municipal, or township meetings, with somewhat smaller percentages participating in lake, river, bay, wetland, or watershed protection groups (7%), volunteer water quality monitoring (6%), and the Master Gardener program (5%). Learning about Water Issues Survey participants were given a detailed list of media options and communication networks and asked whether they have received water resource information from these sources (Figure 19). By far the most common source of information about water resources was local newspapers (56%). Network television (45%) and public television (43%) were the next most common sources of media information, with a similar percentage citing friends and family (43%). A little more than one-third listed radio (37%), approximately one-third included national media sources such as major newspapers (34%) and cable television (33%), and somewhat fewer cited magazines (29%). Environmental agencies (i.e., governments) were listed as an information source by approximately one-third of respondents (32%), while about a quarter cited nongovernmental environmental groups (25%). The lowest percentage of respondents reported receiving water resource information from universities (20%), extension (19%), or schools (14%). When asked about their desire to learn more about a variety of specific water resource topics (Figure 20), most respondents cited protecting public drinking water supplies (40%). A relatively large number of respondents desired having more information about household management issues such as home and garden landscaping (28%), septic system maintenance (26%), and private well protection (21%). Approximately a quarter cited a desire to learn about fish and wildlife water needs (26%) and watershed management (25%), while approximately 20% indicated an interest in water policy and economics. All other categories were cited by fewer than 20% of respondents, with the least amount of interest shown for farm-related issues such as landscape buffers (15%), irrigation management (13%), and animal waste management (10%). Respondents also were asked to note the types of learning opportunities they would most likely utilize in the future (Figure 21). The most commonly cited opportunity was visiting a Web site (46%), followed closely by reading fact sheets, bulletins, or brochures (45%) and watching TV coverage (42%). A significant Figure 19: Previous Sources of Water Resource Information Informa9on Schools Extension UniversiKes Environmental groups Magazines Environmental agencies Major newspapers Cable television Radio Friends and family Public television Network television Local newspapers 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 18 Water Issues in Georgia UGA Cooperative Extension Bulletin 1385

21 number also were likely to read a newspaper article or series (38%). There were fewer responses to all other categories (<15%). Respondent age had a strong effect on the likelihood of using various media sources. For example, only 26% of those over age 65 were likely to use the Internet, with a much higher relative percentage among this age group citing fact sheets (51%) or newspaper articles (47%). Respondents under 50, by contrast, were much more likely to use a Web site (64%) while being somewhat less likely to use fact sheets (44%) and much less likely to use newspapers (32%). Figure 20: Water Resource Areas of Interest Animal waste management Irriga/on management Landscape buffers Forest management and water issues Watershed restora/on Nutrient and pes/cide management Community ac/ons concerning water issues Restoring fish and aqua/c habitat Shoreline clean- up Water policy and economics Private well protec/on Watershed management Sep/c system management Fish and wildlife water needs Home and garden landscaping Protec/ng public drinking water supplies 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Figure 21: Sources for Learning More about Water Quality Get trained for a regular posi<on Take a course for cer<fica<on or credit AHend a short course or workshop AHend a fair or fes<val Take part in a one- <me volunteer ac<vity Learn how to conduct a home, farm, or workplace prac<ces Look at a demonstra<on or display Watch an informa<onal video Read a newspaper ar<cle or series Watch TV coverage Read printed fact sheets, bulle<ns, or brochures Visit a Web site UGA Cooperative Extension Bulletin 1385 Water Issues in Georgia 19

22 CONCLUSION Respondent answers indicated a broad level of concern and knowledge about water resource issues. Not surprisingly, maintaining abundant and clean drinking water clearly emerged as an imperative issue. Very high levels of concern were also expressed for protecting the water quality of streams, lakes, and coastal waters. While a large majority of respondents believe that their drinking water is safe, many believe that there are major problems with the state s groundwater, surface waters, and coastal waters. Respondents also showed a high level of support for programs to protect these resources and expressed confidence in the ability of local governments in particular to carry out this mission. The survey responses also can be used to help outreach and extension professionals target ways to educate the general public about less-known issues. For example, high percentages of respondents indicated that they had little to no knowledge of water transfers (whether in-state or among states). Because water transfers are likely to become increasingly important (and potentially controversial) in Georgia in the near to mid term, building public understanding may allow citizens to engage with community leaders in constructive decision making. Likewise, respondents showed little understanding about coastal hypoxia. In this case, outreach and extension professionals may give priority to educating citizens on this phenomenon and the impact it can have on local communities and the state s economy. There is also significant potential for the survey results to be used as a basis for extension professionals to refine their communication strategies. Survey questions about media habits suggest the need for extension specialists to communicate important information about water resource conservation using a wide variety of media outlets, thus allowing for a larger percentage of the public to receive this information than can be achieved through traditional extension publications and activities alone. Moving forward, it is clear that Georgia, like most other states and regions, will continue to face major water resource challenges over the coming years. Careful assessment of public knowledge and attitudes about water resource issues will remain critical as a mechanism for understanding new trends in opinions and perceptions as well as identifying areas in which outreach and extension professionals may be most needed to provide objective and trusted sources of information. We hope that the results of this study prove useful in serving these ends. 20 Water Issues in Georgia UGA Cooperative Extension Bulletin 1385

23 APPENDIX A: Letter of Invitation January 10, 2009 «fname» «lname» «street» «city», «st» «zip» Dear «fname»: Alabama Arkansas Florida Georgia Louisiana Mississippi Oklahoma Tennessee Texas The University of Georgia is concerned about water issues in Georgia and how these issues affect our businesses and daily lives. Knowing your views and the views of other Georgia citizens about a wide range of water issues is very crucial to guide the University of Georgia s water-related research and educational efforts in Georgia. You have been selected as one of 1,100 Georgia residents who are being asked to share views on water issues. Your responses will represent the 9,700,000 residents of the state. Your response to the questions on the enclosed survey is very important. Would you please complete this questionnaire and return it in the business reply envelope supplied with this mailing? The questionnaire should only take about 10 to 15 minutes to complete. You may note that the business reply envelope is addressed to the University of Idaho as they are collaborating with the University of Georgia as part of a nation-wide effort to collect similar information from many states. All results of this survey will be available to the general public. Your response will be completely confidential. This questionnaire has an identification number in ink in the top right hand corner for mailing purposes only. This is so that we may check your name off the mailing list when your completed survey is returned. Your name will never be placed on the questionnaire itself. My name is Robert Mahler and I am the Water Quality Coordinator at the University of Idaho. I have been conducting water resource surveys in the United States for the past seven years. To ensure this survey s integrity I am working with the Water Quality contact at the University of Georgia (Dr. Mark Risse) to implement the enclosed survey and process your input. If you have any questions, we would be happy to answer them. Our addresses are bmahler@uidaho.edu and mrisse@engr.uga.edu ( ). Please return the survey in the business reply envelope. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Dr. Robert L. Mahler Professor University of Idaho Water Quality Coordinator Dr. Mark Risse Extension Water Quality Coordinator University of Georgia Enclosures UGA Cooperative Extension Bulletin 1385 Water Issues in Georgia 21

24 22 Water Issues in Georgia UGA Cooperative Extension Bulletin 1385

25 APPENDIX B: Survey Questionnaire Water Issues in Georgia: A survey of public attitudes in Georgia Sponsored by: Southern Region University of Georgia University of Idaho January 2010 UGA Cooperative Extension Bulletin 1385 Water Issues in Georgia 23

26 WATER ISSUES IN GEORGIA HOW DO YOU FEEL ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENT? How important are each of the following water issues to you? (Circle one answer per question) Issue Not Somewhat No Very important important opinion Important important 1. Clean rivers and lakes N S O I V 2. Clean marine water N S O I V 3. Clean bays and estuaries N S O I V 4. Clean water for N S O I V shellfishing 5. Clean beaches N S O I V 6. Clean drinking water N S O I V 7. Clean groundwater N S O I V 8. Water for commerce/ N S O I V industry/power generation 9. Water for household N S O I V landscapes 10. Water for agriculture N S O I V 11. Water for aquatic N S O I V habitat 12. Water for recreation N S O I V 13. Water for municipal use N S O I V 14. Interstate transfer/sale N S O I V of water rights 15. Within state transfer/sale N S O I V of water rights 16. Hypoxia (Gulf dead zone) N S O I V 24 Water Issues in Georgia UGA Cooperative Extension Bulletin 1385

27 How important are the following actions in protecting our water resources? (Circle one answer per question) Issue Not Somewhat No Very important important opinion Important important 17. Treating stormwater N S O I V runoff 18. Improving wastewater N S O I V treatment 19. Residential water N S O I V conservation 20. Building new water N S O I V storage structures (dams, reservoirs) 21. Improving home and N S O I V garden practices 22. Preserving & restoring N S O I V buffer zones & wetlands 23. Improving agricultural N S O I V practices 24. Preserving agricultural N S O I V land & open space 25. Better management of N S O I V recreational activities (boating, fishing, ATVs) 26. Better management of N S O I V shoreline access to prevent erosion 27. Improving water quality N S O I V monitoring to detect pollution 28. Making water quality N S O I V and quantity data available to public 29. Educating municipal N S O I V officials UGA Cooperative Extension Bulletin 1385 Water Issues in Georgia 25

28 DRINKING WATER ISSUES 30. Where do you primarily get your drinking water? (Circle one answer) a. Private supply (private well, river, pond, lake) b. Public supply municipal c. Public supply rural water district d. Purchase bottled water e. I don t know 31. Please check all of the boxes that apply to your home drinking water system. I have a water treatment system (softener, etc.) I have a water filter I purchase 5 gallon containers of drinking water I often use bottled water for drinking purposes I never buy bottled water I am satisfied with my drinking water (piped in house) I am not satisfied with my current drinking water (piped in house) My drinking water is separate from my water supply system 32. Do you feel that your home tap drinking water is safe to drink? a. Yes b. No 33. Do you have your home drinking water tested? a. Yes b. No PROTECTING AND PRESERVING WATER RESOURCES 34. In your opinion, what is the quality of groundwater (sources of well water) in your area? a. Good or excellent b. Good, and improving c. Good, but deteriorating d. Fair e. Poor, but improving f. Poor g. No opinion / don t know 26 Water Issues in Georgia UGA Cooperative Extension Bulletin 1385

29 35. In your opinion, what is the quality of surface waters (rivers, streams, lakes, channels, and wetlands) where you live? a. Good or excellent b. Good, and improving c. Good, but deteriorating d. Fair e. Poor, but improving f. Poor g. No opinion / don t know 36. Do you regard water quantity (having enough water) as a problem in the area where you live? (Circle one answer) a. Definitely not b. Probably not c. I don t know d. Probably e. Definitely yes 37. Do you know of or suspect that any of the following pollutants affect either surface or groundwater quality in your area? Know it Suspect it Suspect it Know it is NOT a is NOT a Don t IS a IS a Pollutant problem problem know problem problem a. Pathogens (bacteria, viruses, germs) b. Fertilizer/Nitrates c. Fertilizer/Phosphates d. Heavy metals (lead, arsenic, mercury) e. Minerals (iron, manganese, calcium) f. Pesticides g. Salinity (water too salty) h. Pharmaceuticals (antibiotics, personal care products) i. Petroleum products j. Algae k. Product and waste water from mining l. Septic systems UGA Cooperative Extension Bulletin 1385 Water Issues in Georgia 27

30 38. In your opinion, what is the quality of ocean waters off the coast of the Southern states? a. Good or excellent b. Good, and improving c. Good, but deteriorating d. Fair e. Poor, but improving f. Poor g. No opinion / don t know 39. In your opinion, which of the following are most responsible for the existing pollution problems in rivers and lakes in your state? (Check up to 3 answers) Forestry (wood harvesting) Agriculture crops Agriculture animals Erosion from roads and/or construction, repair Industry Military bases Septic systems Runoff from home landscapes Stormwater runoff Landfills Wastewater treatment plants New suburban development Oil wells and mining 40. Do you know what a watershed is? (Check one box) Yes No 41. How well do you feel each one of these groups is fulfilling their responsibility for protecting water resources in your community? (Circle one answer per group) Very Moderately Don t Somewhat Very Group well well know poorly poorly a. Federal government b. State government c. Your county, city, or town d. Individual citizens Water Issues in Georgia UGA Cooperative Extension Bulletin 1385

31 42. The likelihood of your area suffering from a prolonged drought is: a. Increasing b. Decreasing c. Staying the same d. No opinion 43. The likelihood of your area having enough water resources to meet all of its needs 10 years from now is: a. High (likely enough water) b. Medium c. Low (likely not enough water) d. No opinion 44. Have you or someone in your household done any of the following as part of an individual or community effort to conserve water or preserve water quality? (Check all that apply) Changed the way your yard is landscaped Changed how often you water your yard Changed your use of pesticides, fertilizers, or other chemicals Pumped your septic system (if you have one) Adopted new technologies (low flow faucets, etc.) 45. Have you received water resources information from the following sources? (Check one box per source) Yes No a. Cable television b. Network television c. Public television d. Local newspapers e. Major newspapers f. Extension g. Universities h. Schools i. Environmental agencies j. Environmental groups k. Magazines l. Radio m. Friends and family UGA Cooperative Extension Bulletin 1385 Water Issues in Georgia 29

32 46. Please place an X on the line below to indicate how you see yourself on environmental issues: Average American adult FOR EQUAL FOR TOTAL BALANCE TOTAL NATURAL BETWEEN ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE USE AND PROTECTION USE PROTECTION 47. Have you participated in any of the following activities? (Circle all that apply) a. Master Gardener program b. Volunteer water quality monitoring c. Lake, river, bay, wetland, or watershed protection groups d. County, municipal, township or tribal commission meetings 48. Would you like to learn more about any of the following water quality issue areas? (Check all that interest you) Watershed management Watershed restoration Forest management and water issues Irrigation management Animal waste management Nutrient and pesticide management Private well protection Septic system management Protecting public drinking water supplies Water policy and economics Community actions concerning water issues Fish and wildlife water needs Home and garden landscaping Restoring fish and aquatic habitat Landscape buffers Shoreline clean-up 30 Water Issues in Georgia UGA Cooperative Extension Bulletin 1385